Common Misconceptions about Stock Water Blasters

[isoaker]

I plan to use this thread to capture and comment on various misconceptions regarding the design, manufacturing/production, and selling of water guns and water blasters. If this post/thread ends up developed enough, I will probably end up migrating content I've created into an article for iSoaker.com. However, WWn is a good place to begin drafting up a document like this.
---------------------------------------
Misconception: Manufacturers don't want to make large, powerful water blasters anymore
Reality: Manufacturers will happily create whatever the market (consumers) want and are willing to pay for. The catch is that there needs to be enough expected demand for a product before a manufacturer is willing to produce it; creating large blasters that end up selling poorly in retail can be very expensive, indeed.

Misconception: Manufacturers decide what consumers can ultimately buy.
Reality: While the manufacturers create the design concepts, it is the retailers that must be willing to buy and sell the product in their stores which ends up determining what the consumers end up getting access to. If a retailer is unwilling to carry a product, even if the manufacturer thinks the consumer market will love it, it will never see light of day. The key is if a manufacturer wants to sell something, they must convince the retailer that it is valuable and, well, will result in good profit margins, not just per sale, but also comparatively with respect to other products. For every product a store carries, that means less room for other items that may sell better. When a retailer displays an item, that space is no longer available for another item. If an item doesn't sell, that's wasted space and lost profit since another, more successful item could have been on that shelf instead.

Misconception: Everyone wants and is willing to pay good money ($40-$50 USD) for a CPS2000-class water blaster
Reality: While I'm sure the WWn membership would be more than happy to get CPS2000-class blasters again, the general consumer market just is not as interested. Even when the economy was not as bad (back in 2000), the Monster XL was not flying off the shelves. One must remember that the average consumer has a lot of other interests on where to spend their money and while we know that water warfare is purely awesome, many overlook this fact. At present, even $30 USD water blasters have trouble selling.

Misconception: Better power and performance will yield better sales for a water blaster model.
Reality: If only this were the case. Thing is, many consumers consider a water blaster that shoots, irrespective of how far, as good enough. This ties into why they are not willing to spend much on water blasters since they don't expect much from them, either. Many are brand loyal and many buy things based on perceived value, usually in terms of sheer size and styling. If a water blaster looks good and is a good size, it will likely sell just as well or even better than a not-so-nicely styled water blaster that shoots >40'. This is the area I feel our community comes in; we need to get people to be more critical and have a need and desire for better performing water blasters. If the majority are content with 20' ranges, sure we'll outsoak them in a water fight, but sales won't drive the desire of retailers to want better blasters, thus meaning no reason for manufacturers to be pushing to create better performing equipment. If the consumer market showed a definite demand for better performance, I'm sure we'd see it much sooner.

Misconception: Everyone wants a Super Soaker CPS2000 (or other CPS-class blaster)
Reality: While most would likely appreciate the power available in the original CPS series blasters circa 1996-1998, the younger generation is, at best, likely to have only heard about CPS blasters, but most would have no real understanding or appreciation of them. What the current generation see is what is available on the shelves. So long as a water blaster shoots water, even if not particular well by community standards, it is good enough. The fact that many modern water blasters are not performing as well is actually helping reduce interest in water warfare as consumers are being misled to believe that this is as good as water blasters can get. There is some hope in the stock water blaster world, but persuading the average consumer to focus more on performance as opposed to looks and brand is more of a challenge than we may care to admit to.

Misconception: The water warfare community is too small to make a difference.
Reality: Our water warfare community is on the smaller side, but as most know, we are having effect in the creation of stock water blaster weaponry. Now, many members may feel that changes are not enough or happen too slowly. However, the group should really be truly appreciative of the opportunities presented and understand that some changes, while they may seem simple to make from a modder/homemade-builder view, are not so simple to do when it comes to mass manufacturing a water blaster. The number of considerations that go in every water blaster design are far more than I am willing to go into and I know I would not be able to capture all the nuances of various decisions made regarding why some things make it and others do not or are postponed. All I can say is if you really want to promote water warfare and see the creation of better stock water blasters, keep on dreaming, commenting, and for those inclined, modding and building to create your ideal water blaster. Good ideas can make their way into products; it just takes time, but never think that no one is listening and trying.

More to come...

[martianshark]

Misconception: Manufacturers don't want to make large, powerful water blasters anymore
Reality: Manufacturers will happily create whatever the market (consumers) want and are willing to pay for. The catch is that there needs to be enough expected demand for a product before a manufacturer is willing to produce it; creating large blasters that end up selling poorly in retail can be very expensive, indeed.

So they don't want to make large, powerful blasters anymore, and this is the reason why.

The Stampede costs $50, and it seems to be flying off the shelves.

If Hasbro continues to make blasters that perform this poorly, I think people will start to notice. Even before I became interested in water guns, I expected decent performance (MD2K performance or better) from Super Soaker, especially if I was paying more than five bucks for it. If I never discovered Soakerdom and decided to buy a Thunderstorm, I'm sure I would have been disappointed, and maybe not buy anything from them again. (after that, I probably would have discovered Soakerdom by searching "super soaker thunderstorm sucks" and finding iSoaker)

[DX]

The Stampede costs $50, and it seems to be flying off the shelves.

I'm pretty sure that they don't think in unadjusted figures. That $50 Stampede might have a higher margin by having lower manufacturing costs. Hard to believe given its complexity, but who knows. The size of the nerfing demographic probably can support such guns. There's actually been rumors of Hasbro coming out with longer range stock guns because of competition provided by homemades at high exposure wars. I'll only believe that when I see it, but it's certainly conceivable.

Another misconception that should be added is to what degree the manufacturers "care" about the online communities, as in how much they are influenced by, cater to, or are otherwise affected by, said communities. For BBT, this is surprisingly high seeing how things we want to see in water guns actually are largely reflected in new releases. Yes, we are not getting CPS 2000s, but we are getting things like the Orca reservoir re-oriented. Meanwhile, Hasbro appears to go very low, if at all, anymore. When the community was larger than Nerf and Nerf guns sported "From the makers of Air Pressure Super Soaker" labels on them, I bet we mattered a bit more.

I wish I could disagree with the reality that consumers don't particularly care about the performance, but I am beginning to realize that rational, critical kids are fairly rare. You know, the 8 year old who laments the fall of the days when Americans strove to blow away the competition with superior quality, not designing things to break so they'd need to be replaced with a new product. If you put less chips in a bag, a kid will notice, even when you slap a 25% larger capacity sticker on the bag. Kids aren't that dumb. If you hand little Robbie a Thunderstorm, he will think what a piece of crap, my hose shoots way more water farther than this. So do bottles, buckets, and balloons. Then he goes looking for a better water gun. In this more modern day scenario, little Robbie will do his searching on Google and not the dollar store and once he even so much as catches a glimpse at CPS, this consumer is permanently tainted with what was and what could be. What is cannot suffice when it's clearly inferior. He doesn't give a flying friend that gun A is huge and gun B is small, when gun B clearly shoots much farther than gun A. He will buy gun B, duh. Robbie may be young, but he's not stupid.

I understand how minimizing all the risk is smart business and shareholders will demand it, but if a company is so risk adverse that it doesn't do anything innovative and gutsy with its products, then why does it deserve to matter? Why does it even exist? Why work there? Why be mediocre? Why settle for cod when you could go for swordfish? You could spend your life fishing for cod and be full every day. But, what does your life amount to when you're eating bland cod every day? The swordfish is hard to find, hard to hook, hard to get on your dinner plate. But, the payoff is so sweet when you do get the thing in your mouth. The 2012 Nerf Super Soaker line is like a bunch of codfish to me. It will return an acceptable margin. It will be accepted in stores. It will sell reasonably well. The fishermen, restaurants, and patrons are all satisfied on paper, in cold numbers. However, just because a system works doesn't mean it's worth pursuing. Mediocrity is not worth living for. Talk about an utter waste of one's human potential! The drive to do better, improve, experiment, solve problems, push the boundaries, blaze the trail, and think outside the box is a cornerstone of humanity. You do end up having to deal with risk. Sometimes you get burned, like the "just walked 28 miles in 100+ degree heat to find a rare species of mussel and didn't find it" kind of burned. But, sometimes, you break out and the result was so worth it. You also learn from your adverse experiences (like renting a bike and not going in 100 degree heat). But, just getting burned in itself isn't a reason to drop the goal. If you really care about something, you'll find a way to achieve the goal.

Thus, while the topic provides good, generally neutral information, I still don't think it's covering all the stuff deep down inside. I see a lot of excuses for why no one will make powerful water guns. When one starts throwing up excuses, I have to question whether the drive is really there at all. I realize that each consumer ticks to a different clock, but I have a hard time believing that real people settle for mediocrity. What's the point of being boring?

[Nitro123PG]

^ Kinda hard to follow up on a post like that.

Fact is though, I think a lot of people DO settle for mediocrity. A lot of kids see the teenagers in the commercials, and they think they are cool. Those kids want to be cool like them and they go out and buy these water blasters. Does it suck? Yes. The kid may or may not think that. They haven't seen the alternative, so how will they know that thing is a piece of junk? They have the water gun that the cool teenagers in the commercial had, and the gun shoots water, so the kid is satisfied. The fact these blasters come from Nerf, the company that makes their Nerf guns, isn't helping in the matter.

I think once these kids figure out what else is out there, though, they WILL buy better water blasters, despite the "cool," flashy advertising.

[wetmonkey442]

Thus, while the topic provides good, generally neutral information, I still don't think it's covering all the stuff deep down inside. I see a lot of excuses for why no one will make powerful water guns. When one starts throwing up excuses, I have to question whether the drive is really there at all. I realize that each consumer ticks to a different clock, but I have a hard time believing that real people settle for mediocrity. What's the point of being boring?

Absolutely. I can't agree with this statement more. And to compound this problem, there seems to be diminishing interest in modifications and/or homemades as of late, which is a real shame because some of these contemporary blasters can be cool project-guns (just check out Jeffman's Hydrocannon for evidence).

Sure the general public might be settling for blasters that are under-designed and over-marketed simply because the target audience is now too young to remember how great Super Soakers were 15 years ago. But when the online community begins to settle I really have to worry.

The solution in simple IMO. Stop buying new Super Soakers. Start buying new Water Warriors. Start building or modifying. Hasbro won't notice the loss of one customer, but at least you can say you tried to stand for something as an educated and informed consumer.

[isoaker]

[

Thus, while the topic provides good, generally neutral information, I still don't think it's covering all the stuff deep down inside. I see a lot of excuses for why no one will make powerful water guns. When one starts throwing up excuses, I have to question whether the drive is really there at all. I realize that each consumer ticks to a different clock, but I have a hard time believing that real people settle for mediocrity. What's the point of being boring?

First off, do NOT say no one will make powerful blasters. Some things take time to develop. While it may be easy for members of the community to put together their kick-ass homemade water cannon, it's another thing if you want to mass-manufacture something for a reasonable cost. Let's put it this way, even if you buy things in bulk, let's say that saves ~25%-40%, you then need to factor in labor costs, shipping costs, then roughly double the price to figure how much something will cost in retail stores. Mass manufacturing something is not some sort of magic that makes things suddenly super cheap to make and sell.

As for what people settle for, based on the sort of music many are listening to these days, even mediocrity seems like a high standard. More seriously, it is easy for members of the community to recall back to the days of true CPS-class blasters. Even younger members have likely handled an actual CPS blaster and seen what can be done. This is simply not true for the newer generation. For new-comers, the Nerf Super Soaker Thunderstorm is awesome and performs as it should since they have no point of comparison. Moreover, since most people simply engage in soakfests, their need for better performance is really not there. In fact, there may even be a benefit to using lower output blasters since that makes soakfests last longer before people are truly soaked. Sad, but something to consider.

Again, I think this is where the community comes in. This is where more organized water warfare comes in. WHY should people care about their water blaster performance? Soakfests are not good enough reasons; Competitive games are. Games should cater to casual Players as well as more enthusiastic individuals. I think we're making steps towards this goal, but I'd really like to see more development in this area.

Oh, and please don't go over-comparing the current state of Nerf with the state of water blasters. Dart blasters are an all-season item and, as DX noted, the size of the Nerf demographic can support more expensive blasters, but not sure about flying off shelves versus having limited supply and seemingly disappearing faster. iPhones cost >$399 USD and those fly a heck-of-a-lot faster than any Nerf blaster. Nerf also has the advantage of having many more forms of organized games where size and blaster performance do count. Once upon a time, water blasters also flew off shelves, but the excitement over them has dwindled (has been declining since 2000). If the sport is to grow, need to get the general public more interested in soaking each other again.

[marauder]

For new-comers, the Nerf Super Soaker Thunderstorm is awesome and performs as it should since they have no point of comparison. Moreover, since most people simply engage in soakfests, their need for better performance is really not there. In fact, there may even be a benefit to using lower output blasters since that makes soakfests last longer before people are truly soaked. Sad, but something to consider.

I remember buying a CPS 1000 in 1999 and all the kids in the neighborhood fled in terror from me. The next year, I bought a CPS 1700. I'd swag out in the middle of the street, taunting my enemies, and switch my gun to "cannon mode," aka 10x. No one, outside those of us who had fought in the first Vermin War, had faced a 10x nozzle. Again, they ran.

We didn't start playing 1hk until XN introduced us to it a year after that. Respawn, capture the flag, and more complex games weren't introduced until a few years after that. Point being, I can't be convinced to believe that more power isn't a good thing in a soakfest.

I completely dig your argument on shelf space, but by the same line of reasoning, break down the Lightning Storm and what do you have? A bunch of unnecessary parts taking up extra space. The dimensions of the lightning storm are 58.5 cm (23.03 ") x 29.0 cm (11.42 ") x 38.0 cm (14.96 "). Compare that to a CPS 2100: 59.0 cm (23.23 ") x 12.0 cm (4.72 ") x 29.0 cm (11.42 "). No doubt, the width you list is with the shield extended, but even disregarding that, the CPS 2100 is still smaller or at least of comparable size, and MUCH more powerful. Now, of course, WW cannot use CPS technology for the next so many years. I get that too. We all agree that they are putting out good guns, and we are happy with what they've been doing; but if we are going to talk about progress, if we are talking about achieving true high performance... we can go there. Air pressure technology can shoot just as far as CPS. Look at the SS 300, the 2nd most powerful stock gun ever. What makes it so powerful? Is it the ball valve? Is it the way the pipes/tubes are lined up? Is it having 3 different pressure chambers? If it is anything other than the size of the pressure chambers, a marketable gun could be made with this type of power. It doesn't need a big backpack, and I'm sure Buzz Bee or Hasbro could make it much less awkward/more durable than the SS 300 is. I believe it can be done.

[isoaker]

The width of the Lightningstorm's box is just a little wider than the blaster (sans shield and drum) due to how the stuff is packaged (basically the width of a Thunderstorm ~7.0-8.0cm (2.7"-3.0"). The box, admittedly, is rather large in face, but you can pack a bunch on the shelf since it is not deep. Nevertheless, as stated in other threads, using how Hasbro is currently packaging and marketing things as a standard will lead to confusion. Due to the success of the Nerf brand, they can get away with doing things other manufacturers cannot. They can work with minimal or even loss of profit per sale for their water blaster items if it also means pushing their competition off of the shelf altogether. A minor profit loss with elimination of competition can still net a win overall in the longer run.

As for the soakfest/lower output, be wary about applying what we enthusiasts prefer over what others prefer. From countless soakfests with casual friends, colleagues, co-workers, while all definitely could appreciate the beauty of a large water blast, when it came to gameplay, generally lighter-calibre water blasters were preferred since, to them, games did last longer before everyone ended up dripping wet. While I've played with those who love to soak, be soaked, and continue to soak regardless of how many puddles they are making per step, I've now observed a preference for mid-to-lower output levels with many different groups and simply cannot ignore that while people like getting wet, they often do not wish to get too wet too quickly as they tend to consider complete saturation the end of the game. While we would continue to play well beyond a complete soak, I do not think this is as common as we would hope.

[wetmonkey442]

While I've played with those who love to soak, be soaked, and continue to soak regardless of how many puddles they are making per step, I've now observed a preference for mid-to-lower output levels with many different groups and simply cannot ignore that while people like getting wet, they often do not wish to get too wet too quickly as they tend to consider complete saturation the end of the game.

It's hard to develop a preference for something that you don't have easy access to.

[isoaker]

It's hard to develop a preference for something that you don't have easy access to.

Indeed!

I should note that in the occasions I refer to, I made larger weaponry available for use, but only a few tended to gravitate towards them. I could usually guess who would want what based on what I know of the people involved. Thing is, I even recall battles back in 1999 and 2000 when CPS-class blasters were readily available, yet having most of the casual users picking up XP110/XP310 or SC600 over even the "small" CPS1000. Some would try the CPS2000, CPS2500, and CPS3000 blasters just for the feel of it, then put them down and go for the lighter blasters.

[scottthewaterwarrior]

A lot has been said already so who knows how much I can add, but here goes...
In my experience, the bigger blasters are the first to go; dating back to when I was around 8 I would have battles with my friend Raphie. Maybe I was just born a hard core water warrior, but I would always use the second biggest gun he had but only because he had already taken the biggest for himself. The 6 year old kid across the street, I had a battle with him once, he used a smaller gun, but that was only because I wouldn't let him use my Vindicator. I can kind of understand why with there target audience of 8 year olds, the Hydro Cannon didn't sell to well because of the difficulty of use/carry, but if you gave a kid a choice between a two guns of equal size and tell them, this one shoots twice as far, they will take that one. Isn't Hasbro the one telling kids what to by anyway? With there advertizing campaign, the could easily sell something XP 270 sized, maybe a little bigger. Unless they find a way to pry every one over the age of 12 off there PS3's, I doubt they could sell something CPS 2K sized, but they could at least improve the performance of the guns they are making now. If you think about it Hasbro's current guns are smaller then most XP guns, I can understand an XP over a larger CPS gun, but I think most would still couse an XP over one of Hasbro's current blasters.

It is a risk to start making better guns, but as has been mentioned before, Hasbro can take risks, right now I think that WW is going to beat them in the market, high advertizing budget or not.

The problem is feeding on itself, Catch 22 I think the call it, lack of interest= worse guns= even less interest= really bad guns= eventually guns will have to improve or they will stop selling at all.

[wetmonkey442]

^This trend is known as a positive feedback loop, and is actually a pretty good description of what is happening right now (with the Super Soaker brand at least).

[HBWW]

And another common misconception: That shelf space is prohibitive of blaster performance. There have been numerous solutions innovated in the past to improve capacity while still being friendly to users; one big example being the backpack.

As for the Hydro Cannon, the simple problem is that most kids will not be able to apply hit and run tactics to it; they'll probably just fire it for a second and decide not to bother. (Even if they do the exact opposite in their video games such as by picking up the Spartan Laser over the Assault Rifle in Halo.)

I've been saying it and I'll say it again; there has never been a better time for the superiority of BBT's WW line to stand out than now. It's unfortunate that they lack the resources to just go ahead and throw Nerf SS out of the game now though.

And DX, very well said. The mediocrity you described is true to so many areas of life but seems to be an unfortunate, persistent, and major part of our reality, and there will always be people who say "meh" and not care.

Water warfare has a character and combat style found nowhere else, and therein lies our greatest strength and really our only way to regain what was lost after the CPS era.

[marauder]

Isn't Hasbro the one telling kids how far their guns shoot anyway?

FTFY

Unfortunately, sometimes I wonder how much kids read into the ranges printed on the box. It could be that they don't trust them, that they trust the super soaker name brand more. I know, growing up, I didn't trust range values on boxes, cuz they were always greatly exaggerated. Maybe WW are being beaten on styling?

[HBWW]

It will be interesting to see how things go this year with respect to Hasbro reaching new lows on the SS brand, and I think this year will also serve as a testament to what sells well; the good stuff or the overpriced stuff.

I think Hasbro's trying to ride on the "battery powered, fully automated" bandwagon. Unfortunately for them, arm strength > battery power .

[atvan]

People are not settling for mediocrity. They chose the weapon with the greatest range.



The problem is that people only want to pump 5-10 times, max. SS guns can't be misused, but WW can. Don't add pressure, and you don't have to worry about people adequitely building it up. Hasbro has in som ways played a master stroke by removing the variable of the knowledge of the masses.

[scottthewaterwarrior]

People are not settling for mediocrity. They chose the weapon with the greatest range.



The problem is that people only want to pump 5-10 times, max. SS guns can't be misused, but WW can. Don't add pressure, and you don't have to worry about people adequitely building it up. Hasbro has in som ways played a master stroke by removing the variable of the knowledge of the masses.

I guess this is true, most the little kids I have battled with (the age range Hasbro gears toward) only pump like 3 times and then complain, "its not working!" Most of the time this is with blasters that are hard to pump, they can easily work a Max-D 2000 and even that is better then Hasbro's current junk. I think part of it is the commercials are misleading, kids don't bother reading the box because they already know what the gun is like from the commercials. Wrong! The commercials show the guns shooting 40ft and putting out 5 times as much as the actually do.

Kind of makes me wonder, is the water in the commercials all special effects or do they use modified guns, <- I want some of those "for use in the SS commercial only" guns!

[HBWW]

I think the commercials are just filmed in a way that that make the stream appear better than it really is, through the use of camera angles, slow motion, lighting, and what not. I'd imagine lighting is one of the most important effects. They might also use additives in the water to make it appear better. That's my guess anyway. (And yeah, I'm a few weeks late to post; oh well.)

[soakinader]

Im sorry, I am going to have to necro this thread. But anywho, I have a few points to make.

0- Most of the new super soakers look cool. Real awesome looking, kind of like the entertech uzi water were guns back in the 90's.
The whole stocks & rail attachments thing is gimmicky, but... it is pretty cool. And while I prefer my CPS 1500 over all else, I welcome the Thunderstorm's automatic squirting, and the water clips. They have never been done before, they were done well, I hate them all, and that's fine. I think that it would be great if they released a larger, Scorpion tech-like super soaker with a spherical CPS chamber and at least two nozzle settings.
Water Warriors guns are ugly. I personally exempt the Vindicator, Vanquisher and Hydra Pak for both style and performance, but pretty much everything else is too organicky for me.

Sure modern soakers don't hurl water like older, and better guns, but they are lightweight and easy to pump, or pumpless.
1- Case in point- I can use anything from a CPS 2500 to an XP 150 without any problems. I handed my 9 year old nephew a fully loaded Tiger Shark (he couldn't pump my XP 150) and he nearly fell over. Yes he could eventually pump it enough to give me a good dowsing with the different nozzle settings, including the 6X (which he didn't like) but meanwhile, there was another group of kids running around with scatter blasts and helixes. Sure they had to refill them twice as often, but they were getting each other wet and having fun.

2- Don't forget that the majority of users are little kids. And the majority of buyers are adults, buying the cheapest toys for their kids. I have seen it all too much. It takes a lot of work on the kid's part to convince the parent to buy anything better than buzz bee teks or mavericks.

3- a point that I have not seen anywhere in this is safety. I mean, no stock super soaker is actually deadly or anything*, but parents don't want to have to deal with screaming, crying kids who have, of course, again been shot in the face. Most new super soakers fire a gentle stream or a low-speed glob of water that is less likely to cause complaints and tantrums.

*Don't talk to me about the XP 90, CPS 2000MK1, or anything else. Actually, if anyone has ever been killed by a super soaker, please do.

[the oncoming storm]

In case people don't know the CPS line of blasters was made for, get this TEENAGERS! It was meant for the kids that had grown up using the light XP's, and Classics. Yes they may be bulky, and impractical for little kids to use. But the teenagers they were made for didn't have any trouble wielding these bad boys and they gave them unrivaled soaking power. I was to young to use them when they were in stores, but I have one now a CPS 1200 and It does it's job well and doesn't slow me down to much.

So Impractical for kids yes, Impractical for Teenagers no